[address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Mon Sep 10 17:07:52 CEST 2012
Hi, >>> i can not speak to the intent in the ripe region. but the principal >>> intent of the final /8 policy in the apnic region was so that *new* >>> entrants could get one small piece of the pie. >> >> This was also the original reasoning here in the RIPE region. > > If so, the letter of the policy contradicts this - there is no mention > of only "new" requestors, rather any LIR that can demonstrate a need > will be assigned one last /22. One could reasonably assume that the intention has then failed in the > original policy and is not a valid argument against the proposal... Correct. That is why I said 'original reasoning'. At some point it was decided (as in: declared consensus on) that existing LIRs also should get some addresses for NATs, proxy servers etc. The RIPE NCC can double in member-count while still being able to give every LIR a /22. But the reason the policy was proposed in the first place was for the new entrants. Met vriendelijke groet, Sander Steffann
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]